Conservative Daily News » Democratshttp://www.conservativedailynews.com
The best conservative political news, analysis and opinion articles written by a collection of citizen journalists. Covering a range of important topics in blogs, op-ed, and news posts, these upstanding patriots are bringing back American exceptionalism with every entry..Sun, 01 Mar 2015 18:00:40 +0000en-UShourly1http://wordpress.org/?v=4.1.1Dem Lobbyist: GOP Will Control House and Senate in Mid-Term Electionshttp://www.conservativedailynews.com/2014/04/dem-lobbyist-gop-will-control-house-and-senate-in-mid-term-elections/
http://www.conservativedailynews.com/2014/04/dem-lobbyist-gop-will-control-house-and-senate-in-mid-term-elections/#commentsFri, 25 Apr 2014 18:35:23 +0000http://www.conservativedailynews.com/?p=97369WASHINGTON, April 24, 2014 /PRNewswire-iReach/ — APRIL 24, 2014-WASHINGTON, DC—The Republican majority in the House will rise to its largest margin in history and the Senate will transfer from Democratic control to Republican come the November mid-term elections, says Neil Dhillon, a Democratic lobbyist and former senior congressional aide. It’s inevitable with the President’s approval rating at a record low 37% plus the traditional gains for a President’s opposing party in mid-terms that it will be an historic night for Republicans in November.

Even with 6 months out it’s an easy call to make now, says Dhillon. There’s an added clincher that a large population of newly registered Republican voters are Asian and Hispanics and that will further propel the Republicans in November. The President’s pressure on Congress on Immigration Reform, Energy Dependence, Federal Deficit, and Health Care will continue to determine whether his approval rating will rise or lower over the next few months.

The only good news for Democrats is that the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) raised close to $3 million more than Republicans in the last quarterly report. The Democrats will need to raise at least $20 million more each quarter to have any chance of forgoing full Republican control. And that is a tough road to climb.

The Senate presently has 53 Democrats, 45 Republicans and two Independents. The Republicans need a net gain of 6 seats out of 36 Senate races with Democrats fighting to retain 21 seats that include 6 races in states that Governor Mitt Romney won big in 2012. President Obama should do everything he can do now to forge some type of relations with the Senate Republicans to help ease the pain of his final two years in office. This will not be an easy task as the President and Congress barely talk as it is.

The House presently has 233 Republicans, 199 Democrats, and 3 open seats. Historically, the President’s opposing party makes big gains in mid-terms election plus the President’s approval rating is a low 37%. It appears that the Republicans will gain close to 10 seats and get over a 242 seat majority. If this occurs, this would the largest majority ever by Republicans. Republicans held a 239 seat majority in 1949 and a 242 seat majority in 2010.

]]>http://www.conservativedailynews.com/2014/04/dem-lobbyist-gop-will-control-house-and-senate-in-mid-term-elections/feed/2The BO Behind the Obamacare Numbershttp://www.conservativedailynews.com/2014/04/the-bo-behind-the-obamacare-numbers/
http://www.conservativedailynews.com/2014/04/the-bo-behind-the-obamacare-numbers/#commentsMon, 07 Apr 2014 15:16:34 +0000http://www.conservativedailynews.com/?p=97200If there was one thing that then presidential candidate Barack Obama had right it was his assertion that words matter. That understood, it has always seemed a bit odd to me that a man who presents and proudly proclaims himself a full blown Progressive – if not the quintessential Fabian Progressive – would have alerted the electorate to this fact. Why, you ask? Well, because Progressives are notorious for manipulating the meanings of words to suit their objective needs. Remember, Progressives are the ones who insist that the United States Constitution is a “living document,” meant to facilitate the needs of the times (read: allow government to morph into any authority that the elites believe is needed at any given time).

So, it is with a gigantic grain of salt – a Guinness Book sized grain – that I consume the declarations being made by the Obama Administration on the “numbers of people who have signed up” for health insurance through the federal health exchange. There is a stark difference between “signing up” for the website and purchasing health insurance. Even then, there is a lot of ground between applying for health insurance through the exchange and actually paying the premiums each month.

The truth is, we won’t know how many people have successfully attained health insurance coverage through the “Obamacare Exchange” until after the first month of coverage has completed. This is because for coverage to be in effect it must be paid for. To that end The National Journal reports:

“One of the biggest players in Obamacare’s exchanges says 15 to 20 percent of its new customers aren’t paying their first premium – which means they’re not actually covered.

The latest data come from the Blue Cross Blue Shield Association, whose members – known collectively as “Blues” plans – are participating in the exchanges in almost every state. Roughly 80 to 85 percent of people who selected a Blues plan through the exchanges went on to pay their first month’s premium, a BCBSA spokeswoman said Wednesday.”

It would seem that some – oh, maybe 15 to 20 percent – of those who “signed up” for health insurance through Healthcare.gov have figured out that as long as it appears as though they have signed up for health insurance through the exchange they might be able to circumvent the inaugural Obamacare fine (read: tax, per SCOTUS Chief Justice John Roberts) for not actually having health insurance. Of course, this remains to be seen, but given that the Obamacare website is the laughingstock of the tech world, maybe – just maybe – they might get away with it.

And another facet of this totalitarian Progressive overreach of government – this unconstitutional encroachment into our private lives – is the question surrounding the employer mandate. To date, there have seen so many exemptions given to both organizations and corporations alike, the idea that this is actually a “mandate” is becoming laughable. Let’s face it, when a mandate becomes something only applicable to select factions and demographics, it is less a mandate and more a punishment, and a punishment for “not thinking correctly.”

This Progressive line of thinking is typical of an elitist faction that truly believes – truly believes – they know what is best for everyone, even if the overwhelming majority views the “opinion(s)” of said Progressive elitists as undesirable and oppressive. It is for this reason – the elitist narcissism of the Progressive Left – that a recent declaration by former Obama Press Secretary Robert Gibbs shouldn’t surprise anyone.

“Former White House press secretary Robert Gibbs predicted Wednesday that the oft-delayed Obamacare employer mandate will never go into effect.

“I don’t think the employer mandate will go into effect. It’s a small part of the law. I think it will be one of the first things to go,” Gibbs told a crowd in Colorado, according to BenefitsPro.com.

“The website described the audience as being surprised by Gibbs’s comments…

“Gibbs argued that most employers with more than 100 workers already offer health insurance, and only a relatively small number of companies have between 50 and 99 employees.”

Putting aside, for a moment, Mr. Gibbs’ contention that only a small number of companies have employees numbering between 50 and 99 employees, this is another example of the “words matter” bait and switch, and with ramifications.

We the People, were told – in no uncertain terms – that the employer mandate was essential to the success of Obamacare. The Obama Administration has been so obstinate about this point that they were willing to fight the Hobby Lobby Corporation all the way to the US Supreme Court in an effort to force them to provide “end-of-life-causing” contraception options to their employees – against the moral and religiously-based objections of the company owners. The Obama Administration even tried to strong arm Catholic charities operated by nuns to do the same. Yet now we have one of the “soldiers of the Obamacare Movement” shrugging his shoulders insisting that the employer mandate is no big deal? If that’s true, why coerce nuns and those objecting to the mandate on religious grounds?

Looking further down the list of forced mandates, what could we expect next? Should we get ready for the individual mandate to become expendable, but for, of course, the demographics that are “not thinking correctly”?

If words matter, as now President Obama claimed in the days before his presidency, why don’t they matter now, now that he is president? He promised that Americans could keep their doctors and the insurance plans they enjoyed “period.” Yet that turned out to be a lie, bald-faced. He and his cronies said that the mandates were non-negotiable. But now one of the primary mouthpieces who trumpeted the need for these mandates during this blatant coercion of the American people says the need to mandate employer participation is “not so much.”

Truth be told, there are some provisions of the Affordable Care Act that are beneficial to the American people (dealing with the purchase of health insurance across state lines and addressing pre-existing conditions being two). But the negatives of this legislation far, far out-weigh the positives. Additionally, if federally elected politicians weren’t playing the whore for the behemoth insurance companies and their heartless lobbyists on K Street (let’s remember who was “all in” on getting Obamacare passed) purchasing health insurance would have been open to a national market, thus lowering prices through competition and creating viable options to address the issue of pre-existing conditions.

Don’t look now, but Capitalism is the answer to high health insurance prices and accessibility.

“We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America.”

]]>http://www.conservativedailynews.com/2014/04/the-bo-behind-the-obamacare-numbers/feed/0Roberts Rules Again…Poorlyhttp://www.conservativedailynews.com/2014/01/roberts-rules-again-poorly/
http://www.conservativedailynews.com/2014/01/roberts-rules-again-poorly/#commentsThu, 09 Jan 2014 17:54:27 +0000http://www.conservativedailynews.com/?p=96077Now comes news that Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts has doubled down on his middle finger to the American citizenry by turning away – without comment, which the SCOTUS gets to do – an emergency stay request, filed by the Association of American Physicians & Surgeons and the Alliance for Natural Health USA, to block the implementation of Obamacare.

“Chief Justice John Roberts turned away without comment Monday an emergency stay request from the Association of American Physicians & Surgeons, Inc. and the Alliance for Natural Health USA.

“They asked the chief justice Friday to temporarily block the law, saying Congress had passed it incorrectly by starting it in the Senate instead of the House. Revenue-raising bills are supposed to originate in the lower chamber. They also wanted blocked doctor registration requirements they say will make it harder for independent non-Medicare physicians to treat Medicare-eligible patients.

“Still pending is a decision on a temporary block on the law’s contraceptive coverage requirements, which was challenged by a group of nuns.”

With an overwhelming number of Americans standing against the implementation of this law, an ever increasing realization of consequences that make the law he most expensive entitlement program ever launched, and the Obama Administration’s unconstitutional manipulation of the law’s provision via executive caveat, Chief Justice Roberts had a golden opportunity to rectify his atrocious ruling that allowed for this law to become binding to the American people. Again, Mr. Roberts has cheated the American people from the benefits of constitutional justice.

“All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills…”

That The Patient Protection & Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) originated out of the US House of Representatives as the Service Members Home Ownership Act (HR3590), which has absolutely nothing – nothing – to do with health insurance mandates or so-called reforms. Per the Obama Administration’s own Justice Department rebuttal to a suit brought on the same subject by the Pacific Legal Foundation:

“…attorneys for the Justice Department argue that the bill originated as House Resolution 3590, which was then called the Service Members Home Ownership Act. After passing the House, the bill was stripped in a process known as ‘gut and amend’ and replaced entirely with the contents of what became the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

“Using HR3590 as a ‘shell bill’ may be inelegant, but it’s not unconstitutional, according to the government motion.”

So, the Obama Administration admits that the bill was foisted on the American people disingenuously and nefariously, Justice Roberts ruled it a tax, and yet Roberts refuses to allow the Supreme Court to hear a case that examines and rules on the constitutionality of exactly the unconstitutional aspects everyone says exist.

The big question is this. Why is Chief Justice John Roberts running interference for the Obama Progressives?

“The judicial Power of the United States shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.”

One has to ask, with the caveat that Supreme Court Justices “shall hold their offices during good behaviour” we should all be asking – and asking our elected officials: What shall be done about Chief Justice Roberts; “bad behaviour”?

]]>http://www.conservativedailynews.com/2014/01/roberts-rules-again-poorly/feed/1The Republican Party: When the Body Guard joins the Bully!!!!!http://www.conservativedailynews.com/2014/01/the-republican-party-when-the-body-guard-joins-the-bully/
http://www.conservativedailynews.com/2014/01/the-republican-party-when-the-body-guard-joins-the-bully/#commentsSun, 05 Jan 2014 18:57:45 +0000http://www.conservativedailynews.com/?p=96010I was listening to Rush Limbaugh (Wednesday Dec. 17, 2013) and he had a very interesting call from a woman relating to a survey Limbaugh discussed about men not arguing with or disagreeing with their wife. The survey found that when men never challenged the wife’s decisions the marriage got worse instead of getting better as is the common belief. The caller made the point that men who never stand up for their opinions and beliefs don’t get respect from women.

I am not trying to quote her but rather describe the impression conveyed to me as a listener. She made a point that I have made many times. I don’t know who she was or where she was from but she sounded like a plain everyday American citizen. The interesting thing is that she applied this survey to politics in a way that is practical and makes sense, and goes beyond gender in the analogy. She said that women respect Democrats, even when they don’t agree with them or like them, because they stand up for what they believe in, right or wrong.

I have written many times about my attitude towards Democrats and Republicans. I have a respect for Dingy Harry Reid that Mitch McConnell, John Boehner, John McCain, or any other “moderate” Republican, will NEVER see come their way. I despise everything Reid stands for, and would like to see him go to prison for the rest of his life for the corruption and the violations of the rights of We the People, and the Constitution. He has continually ignored the very Constitution he swore an oath to protect and defend. But Reid is fighting for the tyranny he believes in, and regardless of whether I like his beliefs or not, I respect him for being willing to fight.

Okay, so now you know I don’t care much for Harry Reid. The caller, like me, has no respect for the Republican Party because they are seen as wimps, and can never be depended on to stand up for us against bullies. The constant “bi-partisanship” is not politically attractive to the average woman, or man, in America. No woman wants to be bullied by a man, but no woman wants a man who will let others bully her either, or for that matter let her bully him. Same goes for citizens and politicians.

The TEA Party, as defiled as it is, has a 67% following among American citizens. We the People, the 67% TEA Party We the People, swept Republicans to record setting election results in 2010. This woman caller seemed to be under the TEA Party banner philosophically. The “body guards” (Republican Party) we hired in 2010, the ones who told us they would protect us cower in the corner while the Democrat bullies pound us into submission. What good are they? And now they are joining in with the bullies to pummel the Constitution and We the People.

Sarah Palin identifies with both men and women because she is rightly seen as one of us. She is a fighter, a combatant in the war being waged for liberty. When I see a “Joan of Arc” being attacked by those I send to defend her I am not inclined to ever trust them again. I voted for Republicans in 2008, 2010, and 2012. Now I hear them call me the enemy and a roadblock to “progress”!!!!! The body guard has decided to join in with the bully and hope they get a small piece of the spoils. And they can be sure they won’t be attacked by the bullies if they cower and passively go along with the bullying.

There are those men and women who stand up for us in the realm of politics. Men and women in Congress like Ted Cruz, Mike Lee, Louie Gohmert, Jim Bridenstine, Michelle Bachman, Marsha Blackburn, etc. ARE standing up for the Constitution and freedom of choice of citizens. Not only are these “dedicated body guards” seriously outnumbered by Democrat bullies, they now find themselves being stabbed in the back by those other “body guards” who promised to stand with them against the bullies. The average American citizen wants security but not the kind of “security” we are getting out of those we send to “administer” our government functions. We the People don’t want to be protected from ourselves. We want to be protected from the bullies running a tyrannical government.

I don’t pay a bodyguard to join the bully and help him terrorize me. We the People “hired” the Republican Party in 2010 to protect us from the bullies in the Democrat Party. What do we see in 2013?? The Republican Party establishment, led by Karl Rove, Grover Norquist, Reince Preibus, Mitch McConnell, John Boehner, John Cornyn, John McCain, Lindsey Graham, Peter King, etc. ad nauseum; attack those who are doing what we pay them to do. These “RINO” Republicans have joined in on the bullying we “hired” them to stop.

Ted Cruz and those who stand with him are doing the job we paid them to do. This caller to Limbaugh made the point that those standing against the Democrat bullies are the ones she admires and respects. I was able to identify with her about three sentences into her call. She first talked about the personal relationship a woman wants with a man and then made a political comparison. I am not a woman but I understand basic human nature. I don’t want “friends” who will turn on me when I need them and I don’t want political “representatives” who will turn on me because that is the easiest and most profitable path for them.

People who give me the “if you don’t blindly vote for Republicans you are voting for Democrats” line are wasting their time. I will vote only for those who will be the bodyguard I pay them to be and no one else, regardless of party. The days of me voting for Republicans because they aren’t Democrats are over. I really don’t see any benefit to vote for them. When they aren’t cowering in fear they are joining in on the bullying, and that isn’t something I am going to vote to continue!!!!!

I submit this in the name of the Most Holy Trinity, in faith, with the responsibility given to me by Almighty God to honor His work and not let it die from neglect.

Bob Russell

Claremore, Oklahoma

January 5, 2014

]]>http://www.conservativedailynews.com/2014/01/the-republican-party-when-the-body-guard-joins-the-bully/feed/2Re-Writing Benghazi for Political Purposeshttp://www.conservativedailynews.com/2013/12/re-writing-benghazi-for-political-purposes/
http://www.conservativedailynews.com/2013/12/re-writing-benghazi-for-political-purposes/#commentsTue, 31 Dec 2013 19:00:52 +0000http://www.conservativedailynews.com/?p=96027In typical Progressive fashion, the New York Times set itself to re-writing the events of al Qaeda’s 2012 attack on the US embassy compound in Benghazi, Libya; an attack that took the lives of four Americans, including a US ambassador. At any other point in the history of our country, the assassination of a US ambassador by a foe that launched an attack against American citizens the magnitude of September 11, 2001, would be greeted with a united front; embraced as tantamount to an act of war. But the United States has been co-opted by the Progressive Movement and when one of their own is in the White House – or when one of their own is positioning for the White House – history is subject to revision.

Incredibly, the New York Times – long understood by “the aware” to have ceased being a provider of truth and fact, in deference to position and ideology – has issued a “report” that not only flies in the face of the facts (facts acknowledged not only by State Department officials intimate with the events, but by factious elements of al Qaeda in Libya) but go well beyond any semblance of credibility in its conclusions:

“The investigation by The Times shows that …Benghazi was not infiltrated by Al Qaeda, but nonetheless contained grave local threats to American interests. The attack does not appear to have been meticulously planned, but neither was it spontaneous or without warning signs.

“The violence, though, also had spontaneous elements. Anger at the video motivated the initial attack. Dozens of people joined in, some of them provoked by the video and others responding to fast-spreading false rumors that guards inside the American compound had shot Libyan protesters. Looters and arsonists, without any sign of a plan, were the ones who ravaged the compound after the initial attack, according to more than a dozen Libyan witnesses…”

This accounting completely disregards many facts that congressional hearings have brought forth from State Department and CIA operatives knowledgeable on the events of September 11, 2012. It also defies testimony by those with infinitely more knowledge on military capabilities than a lone researcher at the New York Times, including elected intelligence committee members from both sides of the political divide:

“‘I dispute that, and the intelligence community, to a large volume, disputes that,’ Michigan GOP Rep. Mike Rogers, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, told FOX News Sunday. He also repeatedly said the story was ‘not accurate.’

“Rogers was joined on the show by California Democrat Rep. Adam Schiff, who said, ‘intelligence indicates Al Qaeda was involved.’”

That said, the efforts by New York Times researcher David D. Kirkpatrick are not centered in confronting the facts of the events of Benghazi, they are focused on changing the narrative ahead of the 2016 General Election.

It cannot be denied that then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton – now the Progressive front-runner for the Democrat nomination for president two years out from the 2016 General Election – was considerably marginalized by not only ineffective stewardship of the embassy compound in Benghazi in the days prior to the attack, but by the almost non-existent response during the attack and the incredibly inept response to the slaughter when called on the carpet by those elected to represent the people. This “triple whammy,” if left “un-spun,” would cripple the candidacy of even the most connected of Progressives – even with the support of a favorable mainstream media.

Enter the New York Times and David D. Kirkpatrick. Devoted sycophants to the Progressive cause, they have embarked on the rejuvenation of Ms. Clinton’s political reputation by attempting to re-write the facts of the event, already proven, in an effort to move her out of the ring of responsibility; in an effort to remove the stain of culpability and responsibility from the fabric of her candidacy. Sadly, even those in the mainstream media who exist on the Right side of the political divide, are tunnel-visioned in their focus; focused on the report and the reports conclusions rather than the motives behind the creation of the report – a work of fiction in its conclusions.

If the establishment Right – both inside the beltway and in the mainstream media, along with the Conservatives in the new media, fail to spotlight this blatant attempt to re-write history; fail to spotlight and explain the motives behind this manipulation of the truth, then we, as a nation, will have fallen – once again – for the Progressive tactic of re-definition of words, facts and events, in their quest to advance the Progressive agenda – and agents who would advance that agenda – into the accepted American lexicon.

The fact of the matter – and this cannot be denied when the facts are acknowledged and accepted – is this: Ms. Clinton failed to answer the “emergency 3am phone call” and because of that people died and an act of war against the United States by our global foe – al Qaeda and the radical Islamists who fuel the movement – was executed. In Ms. Clinton’s failure to act as an adequate steward of the US State Department, and in her refusal to resign for President Obama’s completely disingenuous excuse for the catalyst for the attacks – an excuse that Mr. Kirkpatrick and the New York Times have advanced – she has exposed herself as just another Progressive political minion who will do anything and say anything to gain power; who will lie, cheat, steal and deceive to advance the Progressive cause.

But then, “What difference, at this point, does it make?”

]]>http://www.conservativedailynews.com/2013/12/re-writing-benghazi-for-political-purposes/feed/0Are You A Republicrat?http://www.conservativedailynews.com/2013/11/are-you-a-republicrat/
http://www.conservativedailynews.com/2013/11/are-you-a-republicrat/#commentsSat, 16 Nov 2013 16:13:08 +0000http://www.conservativedailynews.com/?p=95529Are You A Republicrat?

I am not a liberal. I am a conservative. When I say conservative, I do not mean the rank and file CINO, or Conservative In Name Only. I mean that I am a genuine, common sense, down to earth person who will vote for a candidate based on moral constitutional principles of integrity regardless of party. Now before you turn me off labeling me as some fringe wacko libertarian kind of nut, just hear me out.

I am conservative! I am conservative in my suits, ties, manners, religion, music, politics . . . etc. I am a church attending Christian, pro-life anti-abortion, heterosexual husband and father, gun owning, Bible totin’, evangelistic man. I agree with your right to disagree with me and will help you defend that right, but will not stand by passively while you shove your opposing views down my throat. Your opinion is not more important than mine and warrants no special treatment above mine. I believe prayer in Jesus’ name in public or private is constitutional and believe the state should keep its nose out of the free exercise of religion, as stated plainly in the first amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America.

I am not for legalizing drugs, and am opposed to big brother government, and think government should be shrunk by at least 95 % since government has boldly gone where our founding fathers never intended. I support the average American little guy of any color or ethnic background, who breaks his back supporting this country and its socialist agenda of spending. I know how to spend what little I make better than out of touch politicians who are more concerned about padding their pockets, pleasing fringe groups and influencing their constituents, rather than representing their constituents.

May I continue in honesty? Thank you. The Democrats started giving away the store under Franklin Delano Roosevelt, then mainstreamed it with Lyndon Baines Johnson’s “Great Society,” Barack Hussein Obama has now taken this country to new heights (by the trillions) making Roosevelt, Johnson and others look like amateurs. Though the Republican Party at one time in the past, vigorously opposed this type of liberalism and socialism repeatedly, there is not a dime’s worth of difference today between the elite leadership of the Democrats and the Republicans. The GOP has not stood where it should have stood concerning such things as NAFTA and TARP and stimulus spending, and raising the debt ceiling, and has sold us all down the river on Obamacare.

I am not a party man. I swear allegiance to principle, not party, and that principle is reflected in any candidate I may support. The issue today is no longer between the donkey and the elephant. America does not have a two party system: there is only one party with two branches, Democrat and Republican or what I call the Republicrats. The battle is between the America hating, Marxist/socialists from both parties as they try to run rough shod over We The People, the ones who elect these charlatans. It is time to wake up smell the coffee, re-elect NO ONE and throw every politician out of office, replacing each and every one with statesmen and patriots who will serve the people who elected them, then go back home to their jobs and let the next round of elected officials serve their term, then go home, etc. etc.

I will not vote for another Republican in conservative clothing. Will the real America wake up, unite and prepare for battle? This can be our finest hour.

Joseph Harris is a pastor and former Bible college instructor and has been writing columns since 2000. houdini59@att.net

One of the interesting items which occurred during the vote in the Senate to stop the government shutdown and raise the debt ceiling was the surprise appearance of the Senate stenograhper at the microphone. She took the mike and began to decry the vote by shouting about the Freemasons and the Constitution and then quoted the Bible verse, “A house divided cannot stand.”

What I found fascinating was that this woman unitentionally stated the current condition of the Republican party especially in the Senate. I saw this division commented on in news programs both before and after the agreement was reached. Commentators from the right and left were both saying how this war among Republicans was a very bad thing for the party. I suggest this is not necessarily the case.

First of all, an examination of the groups within the GOP is in order. One group is popularly known as the “Establishment” Republicans. They are the members of Congress who have been in office the longest and were elected prior to the 2010 mid-term elections. They are characterized by Senator John McCain and those like him. They believe that in politics you must “go along to get along.” They continually give in and compromise to the opposition so as not to offend anyone else and maintain party power in Washington. In other words, the priority of the Establishment GOP is the maintaining of political power for themselves.

The second group in the GOP are known as the “Tea Party” Republicans. They basically came into existence with the 2010 mid-term election victories. They are represented by people such as Rand Paul and Ted Cruz, both of recent filibuster fame. This group is excoriated repeatedly by the main stream media, the Democratic Party and the Establishment GOP as those who cause division and stir up trouble on Capitol Hill. Which is exactly what they do. However, contrary to their opposition, they act because of the ideal that our nation is a Constitutional Republic and should therefore be both morally and fiscally conservative. In other words, the priority of the Tea Party fealty to our founding document and principles of freedom which inspired it. That priority is what they have remained loyal to no matter the vitriol thrown their way.

Democrats suffer no such division. Those on the left are united behind their leader, President Obama. And President Obama is very much a commited zealot to, as he himself put it, the “fundamental transformation of America.” I maintained as long ago as the primaries for the 2008 nomination, this was the one statement then candidate Obama made everyone should believe and beware of, because Obama believes it himself. His actions demonstrate that he is sold out to an ideal of a Socialist state with at least Muslim leanings. He and those with him will never compromise anything unless it furthers his cause.

This appears very bad for the Republicans, however in truth, it is only bad for the Establishment GOP. They are used to politcal battles. They know how to fight for political gain with compromise. They do not know that to win against those committed to a cause, you must be more committed to the rightness of your cause. History has demonstrated this time and time again. WWII and the Cold War were examples of such.

That’s why the Establishment GOP is in big trouble, and why the Tea Party Republicans have hope of victory. Tea Party Republicans hold fast to an ideal of freedom not unlike the Allies in WWII and the West during the Cold War. Establishment Republicans only seek political survival. No one outside party loyalists is inspired to commit to the non-ideal of simply gaining political power. Unless the Establishment types convert to the ideals of the Tea Party, they will continue to lose and eventually cease to exist as even a political force. Money may prop them up for a while, but sooner or later they will fade away, and I would say good riddance. In a war for freedom against “fundamental transformation” to socialist servitude, there is no place for fear and the compromise politics resulting from it. In this case “a house divided” is a good thing for it forces the power mongers to change or leave as long as we who fight for the right ideal of freedom stay the course. The result is a stronger and more effective political force that can fight and prevail against the left.

]]>http://www.conservativedailynews.com/2013/10/a-house-divided-is-good/feed/1Why did government shutdown?http://www.conservativedailynews.com/2013/10/why-did-government-shutdown/
http://www.conservativedailynews.com/2013/10/why-did-government-shutdown/#commentsMon, 21 Oct 2013 19:15:31 +0000http://www.conservativedailynews.com/?p=95059Ever since Ted Cruz decided to take a stand against the Democrats, we’ve been going in circles making the entire situation far too complicated. What made the shutdown such an abysmal failure for Republicans? You want a simple answer to that question, watch this video from CDN Radio’s own Dustin Hoyt. We did this to ourselves, with stupid infighting, and a failure of constituents to remind their elected officials exactly how our system works. People like John McCain need to be reminded that they can (and should) be removed from office by the people, when they fail to do what they’ve been elected to do. Also, we need to stop letting the Democrats control the narrative. Republicans were not the ones that refused to negotiate – they were.

]]>http://www.conservativedailynews.com/2013/10/why-did-government-shutdown/feed/0Dems outraise GOP for first timehttp://www.conservativedailynews.com/2013/10/dems-outraise-gop-for-first-time/
http://www.conservativedailynews.com/2013/10/dems-outraise-gop-for-first-time/#commentsMon, 21 Oct 2013 11:42:16 +0000http://www.conservativedailynews.com/?p=95046For the first time this year, extreme left progressives have raised more money than moderate and conservative politicians.

The Democratic National Committee has narrowly edged its Republican rival in fundraising for the first time all year.

In a Sunday release, the Republican National Committee reported raising $7.1 million in September. Democrats on Friday reported a cash haul of nearly $7.4 million in September, while finishing the month with more than $5 million on hand.

Despite bringing in less money than democrats, RNC Chairman Reince Priebus tried to put a positive slant on the news by saying, “It’s because of the strong support of our donors that we are able to build a permanent ground operation and ensure a year-round presence in communities all across America.”

Realizing that the Democrats have had a solid focus on the banning of firearms, ammunition and accessories related to hunting and the shooting sports, this news should be alarming. Our current administration has signed the U.N. Arms treaty and several Democrat states have put oppressive bans in place. Hearing that large companies are funding the progressive agenda is what sends up the red flags – it may take a grass roots movement if there is to be hope to save the right to own a firearm.

The scandals in the NSA and IRS, failures in implementing Obamacare, the tragedy in Benghazi, the endless and misguided military presence in Afghanistan, an economic recovery that is leaving more people on disability, unemployment and the street than ever before .. and the party in power is still able to raise gobs of money.

It would seem that progressives are indeed VERY happy with the direction the country is headed in.

]]>http://www.conservativedailynews.com/2013/10/dems-outraise-gop-for-first-time/feed/0How Obamacare Screws the Working Class…Hardhttp://www.conservativedailynews.com/2013/10/how-obamacare-screws-the-working-class-hard/
http://www.conservativedailynews.com/2013/10/how-obamacare-screws-the-working-class-hard/#commentsThu, 17 Oct 2013 00:18:04 +0000http://www.conservativedailynews.com/?p=94952Now that it is becoming clear that the establishment House Republicans are about to capitulate to the Senate Democrats and Obama Progressives, it is clear that, short of Republicans taking the Senate in 2014 and the White House in 2016, Obamacare is set to sink into the flesh of the American entitlement system not unlike a bear’s claws sink into the flesh of its prey. Regardless of whether or not the federal healthcare exchange website functions adequately or not (get used to it, it’s government inferiority at work), the bureaucracy has just expanded and your wallets are about to do the opposite.

One of the things that people are going to have to come to understand is how the Internal Revenue Service – yes, the same Internal Revenue Service currently under investigation for targeting Conservative political groups – will be assessing the penalties (read: enforcing Obamacare) on those who choose not to “participate.” The fact of the matter is that it is both less ominous, yet more disturbing, than people think.

The penalties levied under the Affordable Care Act, under the usually heavy hand of the IRS, is not so much under the ACA. In fact, the pathway for extracting the Obamacare penalty from non-participants is exclusive to the garnishment of any federal tax refunds due. If one chooses not to acquire qualifying health insurance, the IRS will withhold the amount of the penalty that must be paid from any federal tax return refund that is owed an individual in violation of the statute.

The IRS will not have the power to charge you criminally or seize your assets if you refuse to pay. The IRS will only have the ability to sue you. And the most the IRS can collect from you if it wins the suit is 2 times the amount you owe. So if you want to thumb your nose at the penalty-tax, the IRS won’t be able to do as much to you as they could if you refused to pay, say, income tax.

So, unlike when an individual fails to pay their federal income taxes, there won’t be a cadre of black uniformed federal agents armed with fully-automatic weapons kicking in your door in the middle of the night. You won’t be “frog-marched” out of your house in irons, past your disenchanted neighbors, to face the swift righteousness of redistributive social justice (I am being sarcastic, but less so than I would have been just a few years back).

But one question that eludes the thoughts of most people where this matter is concerned is this. What happens if you don’t “participate” in Obamacare but you aren’t due any federal tax refund? What if you are one of the 47 percent who does not pay federal income tax? What if you are über-wealthy and can afford a wizard tax attorney who can figure out how you can “zero out” on your federal taxes each year?

Well, the short answer is this. If you don’t pay federal income tax, technically, you don’t have to pay the fines under the Affordable Care Act. If you are one of the hard-working Americans who has federal taxes withheld from your paycheck – oh, you know, like Middle-Class, blue-collar and union workers not covered by the Executive Branch union carve-outs of the law – you will have to pay the penalty out of your tax refunds. If you are one of the 47 percent of the American public who doesn’t pay federal income taxes, you get to “skate” the Obamacare penalty. Ditto for the “One Percenters.”

One has to wonder whether H&R Block is going to be flooded with new clients trying to figure out how to pay their federal income taxes to the penny throughout the year so that they “zero out.”

And let’s be honesty, the IRS is not going to come after every person who “skates” the $95 dollar (or 1 percent of earnings) penalty being assessed in 2014, even if they did seek to hire upwards of 16,000 new IRS agents since the passage of this freedom-crushing law.

So, when one comes to understand this very stark reality, the obvious question is this. If the indestructible demographic (the 21 to 32 year-old demo) doesn’t sign-up for the Obamacare exchanges in droves – and droves upwards of 80% of their demographic, and 47 percent of the country doesn’t pay federal income taxes, who actually pays for the expanded coverage mandated under the Affordable Care Act? Who is on the hook for Obamacare?

The answer – again – is the Middle-Class, blue-collar and union workers not covered by the Executive Branch union carve-outs of the law…and new taxes on everyone. Again, BusinessInsider.com reports:

Here are some of the new taxes you’re going to have to pay to pay for Obamacare:

▪ A 3.8% surtax on “investment income”( dividends, interest, rent, capital gains, annuities, house sales, partnerships, etc.) when your adjusted gross income is more than $200,000, $250,000 for joint-filers. What is “investment income?” (WSJ)

▪ A 0.9% surtax on Medicare taxes for those making $200,000 or more, $250,000 joint. (WSJ)

▪ Flexible Spending Account contributions will be capped at $2,500. Currently, there is no tax-related limit on how much you can set aside pre-tax to pay for medical expenses. (ATR.org)

▪ The itemized-deduction hurdle for medical expenses is going up to 10% of adjusted gross income. (ATR.org)

▪ The penalty on non-medical withdrawals from Healthcare Savings Accounts is now 20% instead of 10%. (ATR.org)

▪ A tax of 10% on indoor tanning services. This has been in place for two years, since the summer of 2010. (ATR.org)

▪ A 40% tax on “Cadillac Health Care Plans” starting in 2018.Those whose employers pay for all or most of comprehensive healthcare plans (costing $10,200 for an individual or $27,500 for families) will have to pay a 40% tax on the amount their employer pays. (ATR.org)

▪ A”Medicine Cabinet Tax” that eliminates the ability to pay for over-the-counter medicines from a pre-tax Flexible Spending Account. (ATR.org)

▪ A “penalty” tax for those who don’t buy health insurance.

▪ A 2.3% excise tax on medical devices costing more than $100. (Breitbart.com)

So those are some of the new taxes you’ll be paying that will help pay for Obamacare…

Note that these taxes are both “progressive” (aimed at rich people) and “regressive” (aimed at the middle class and poor people).

The cost of this program will not be affordable for the individuals – almost every story but for those who get taxpayer-funded subsidies is one of tripled premiums and deductibles, and it won’t be affordable for the country, especially when the bureaucrats and elitist political class put the price tag of the whole Obamacare ball of infected earwax at approximately $2 trillion dollars.

Now, President Obama is quoted as having said, in an interview with the Spanish-Speaking television network Univision, that:

Once [the budget impasse is rectified], you know, the day after – I’m going to be pushing to say, call a vote on immigration reform…And if I have to join with other advocates and continue to speak out on that, and keep pushing, I’m going to do so because I think it’s really important for the country. And now is the time to do it.

And as the “indestructible” demographic (21-32 years of age) fails to sign-up for the Obamacare exchanges, pro-amnesty Progressives will begin insisting that illegal immigrants (I’m sorry, I mean undocumented uninvited guests) be added to those eligible for Obamacare. Understanding that the 47 percent of those who do not pay federal income tax cannot be fined, and that the One Percenters can affords to have their taxes “zero out,” how long will it be until Progressives scream “crisis” and demand massive, Middle-Class killing. economy destroying, Cloward-Piven-styled tax increases?

Who is John Galt?

]]>http://www.conservativedailynews.com/2013/10/how-obamacare-screws-the-working-class-hard/feed/1Federal Government: Embarrassing to the Point of Painfulhttp://www.conservativedailynews.com/2013/10/federal-government-embarrassing-to-the-point-of-painful/
http://www.conservativedailynews.com/2013/10/federal-government-embarrassing-to-the-point-of-painful/#commentsThu, 03 Oct 2013 18:05:30 +0000http://www.conservativedailynews.com/?p=94587As the so-called “government shutdown” drags on, one thing is hard not to admit: the Obama Administration is acting in a manner that is attempting to extract the maximum amount of pain on the American people. While many are wondering how it came to this point, those of us who actually paid attention in Social Studies, Civics and American History classes – school subjects that are, today, given little, if any, attention –
understand it’s because the US Constitution and the purity of the original governmental process has been raped by the opportunistic political class.

Our nation has always had a robust political discourse, commencing from before we were even a documented nation. We have always been represented by a passionate, spirited political class; strong in their beliefs, but educated and knowledgeable enough to legislate and govern for the good of all the people. Today, this is not the case.

Today, we have a political class that insists on the importance of ideologically motivated political “achievements” over the honest representation of the American people; loyalty to political faction – of which each and every Framer and Founder warned – over loyalty to those who delivered them to power via the ballot box.

Today, we literally have people in the political class that have an inferior command of the English language, an inferior and under-performing understanding of the principles of the Constitution and the Charters of Freedom, and a devotion to Progressivism; a non-indigenous, Marxist-based ideology that believes the State is the Alpha and the Omega; the giver of rights and the final arbiter of freedom and liberty.

Today, we have a government that does not – does not – serve the American people, evidenced – in a singular point – by the overwhelming and sustained majority of Americans who do not want the Affordable Care Act implemented on any level.

Is the Obama administration employing a make-it-hurt strategy to gain political leverage in the budget battle on Capitol Hill?

Republicans are making that charge as the stalemate drags on, and point to the Pentagon furlough of 400,000 civilian staffers — even though Congress passed and the president signed a bill to supposedly keep them on the job…

Republicans argue that the intent of the law was to keep them on the job, and that the Obama administration “narrowly interpreted” it against congressional intent in order to furlough more employees.

It’s one example of how, Republicans say, the administration is making the partial shutdown of government services worse than it needs to be. Many have complained about the National Park Service cordoning off even open-air monuments in Washington, DC, such as the World War II Memorial.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV), responded to criticisms by saying, “It is time for Speaker Boehner to stop the games.”

Shamefully, FOX also reported that correspondence on this situation has stalled because, as Rep. Buck McKeon (R-CA), stated, “Unfortunately, most of the staff who draft congressional correspondence are furloughed.”

A few notes on this shameful situation.

First, and to be equally critical to both sides, if “staffers that draft congressional correspondence” have been furloughed, perhaps those elected to Congress should learn to (and actually) write their own correspondence.

Second, to the Progressives, Democrats and our embarrassing President, it is never “game-playing” when the taxpayer’s money is being spent. It is “game-playing” when members of our military who have been maimed and permanently injured can’t get medical care because the politically opportune refuse to entertain appropriations passed through a traditional method (not every spending bill has to be an omnibus package, in fact traditionally, the 12 appropriation bills have been passed separately).

House Republicans “screwed the pooch” when they didn’t advance ACA funding as a separate, stand-alone appropriations bill from the start. When House Speaker Boehner stated that this Congress would operate under “regular order” he should have stated that the House would be de-bundling all legislation into stand-alone pieces, shining the light of truth and accountability on everything that passed across the House floor. Sadly, traditional, inside-the-beltway pork politics prevailed and the practice of bundling legislation to appease the politically greedy has delivered us to this point.

Truth be told, had the political class not blindly followed the Progressive Movement into ratifying the 17th Amendment, none of this would have ever come to pass. But, then, the Commerce Clause wouldn’t have even come close to allowing much of what the Federal government has done that encroaches into our daily lives.

Additionally, if Harry Reid would have operated lawfully, the omnibus appropriations package would have already been legislated, as he is – is – bound by law to have produced a budget by April 15 of each year. He has not done so since before Republicans took control of the House.

The sad, but glaringly true, fact is this. Our government has become too big and too bureaucratic. Our government has manipulated and strayed from the boundaries of the US Constitution, which is a mandated blueprint for limiting government.

Until We the People insist on repealing the 17th Amendment so as to re-employ constitutional protections for the States, and until Congress re-visits the Federal government’s grotesquely over-reaching interpretation of the Commerce Clause, it will be up to the States to save the nation, either by Constitutional Convention (which in and of itself is very dangerous were the original words of the Constitution to be manipulated by the opportunistic) or by, God forbid, secession.

And it is with tears in my eyes for our country; for freedom; for liberty itself, that I acquiesce to the notion. Buy, my God, are we to allow the greatest achievement of freedom in the history of the world be extinguished at the hand of ideological bullies?

The words of Patriot Patrick Henry said so very seriously then, are just as cogent today:

“Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! — I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!”

]]>http://www.conservativedailynews.com/2013/10/federal-government-embarrassing-to-the-point-of-painful/feed/2The Fomentation of a Government Shut Downhttp://www.conservativedailynews.com/2013/10/the-fomentation-of-a-government-shut-down/
http://www.conservativedailynews.com/2013/10/the-fomentation-of-a-government-shut-down/#commentsTue, 01 Oct 2013 20:59:59 +0000http://www.conservativedailynews.com/?p=94558Well, it is upon us, the dreaded government shutdown. And yet the Earth still spins, the water still runs, the electric is on and Harry Reid is still tossing verbal grenades at anyone who dares represent an opposing view to the lock-step Progressive agenda. Imagine that! Our daily lives didn’t come to a grinding, catastrophic halt because the big government nanny state was sidelined by the fruits of their own discontent. In fact, to paraphrase an often heard chant at any Leftist-leaning protest march, “This is what not spending looks like!”

Truth be told, if our nation would have stayed true to our Founding Documents, the crisis that delivered unto us this dastardly government shutdown would never had existed. Indeed, if we would have executed government with fidelity to the Constitution, to governmental process and to the legislated laws instead of capitulating to the Progressive’s fundamental transformation of the United States of America (a transformation launched at the turn of the 20th Century), World War II veterans wouldn’t have had to push aside hastily erected barriers meant to shut down the World War II Memorial on the Mall in Washington, DC, Tuesday simply to experience the memorial erected in their honor.

I mention a lack of fidelity to the US Constitution and the rule of law because had two specific established protocols – Article I, Section 3 of the US Constitution and The Budget Control Act of 1974 – been honored, not only would the environment in Washington, DC, been devoid of gridlock, but regular order would have mandated the annual delivery of appropriations to the various departments and agencies.

“The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, chosen by the Legislature thereof for six Years; and each Senator shall have one Vote.” (Emphasis added)

Where the members of the House of Representatives were to serve as the “voice of the people,” the Senate was supposed to act as the protector of States’ Rights. The check-and-balance between the co-equal branches of government was to have a check-and-balance within the Legislative Branch to assure that both the voice of the people and the rights of the States were balanced in any legislation that would emanate from that branch of government. By constructing this internal check-and-balance, the Framers enshrined the power to both force compromise with the Executive Branch and protect the rights of the minority (Read: States’ Rights) in the Legislative Branch.

But with the Progressive Era’s 1912-1913 achievement of the 17th Amendment, that check-and-balance, along with the protection of States’ Rights was obliterated, and a gigantic move toward a centralization of government power at the Federal level was achieved.

“The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote. The electors in each State shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislatures.” (Emphasis added.)

So, by effectively transforming the US Senate from a protector of States’ Rights to a redundant chamber catering to the voice of the people, Progressives created two chambers vulnerable to political faction; two competing political entities that could gridlock because their tasks were the same – their authorities derived from the same source.

Today, had the 17th Amendment not existed, the US House of Representatives would have advanced their bill to defund the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and the Senate – given that 38 States have indicated they do not support the ACA – would have concurred, sending a Continuing Resolution to fund the whole of government but defunding the ACA to President Obama. The President would have almost certainly vetoed the legislation which, by virtue of the Senates’ loyalty to their respective State Legislatures, would have been overturned by the whole of the Legislative Branch. Of course, this is predicated on the ACA ever having had become law in the first place, which, under the original intent of the US Constitution, would be questionable.

Additionally, had the United States Senate, under the disingenuous and corrupt political hand of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV), not insisted on existing in defiance of a federal law – The Budget Control Act of 1974, the entire Continuing Resolution process wouldn’t have taken place.

“…Congress pass two annual budget resolutions (it later was decreased to one) and set timetables for finishing budget work. The budget resolution specifies spending levels in broad areas and may direct congressional committees to find ways to save money. Initially the date for completing the budget resolution was May 15, but later the deadline was changed to April 15.

“It’s a deadline Congress seldom has met. Since 1974, Congress has only succeeded in meeting its statutory deadline for passing a budget resolution six times. Sometimes it’s months late. Sometimes, as in Fiscal 2011, Congress doesn’t pass a budget resolution at all.

“Another section of the Budget Act of 1974 states that Congress cannot consider any annual appropriations bills until it adopts an overall budget blueprint…In Fiscal 2011 there should have been 12 appropriations bills.”

So, had Senate Majority Leader Reid actually adhered to the law by advancing a budget resolution to be reconciled, this “showdown” might never have come to pass. But, because there are automatic increases built into each annual budget to account for inflation, etc., it was to the benefit of the spendthrifts in Congress to refuse to advance – or even negotiate – a budget resolution. By using a Continuing Resolution they didn’t have to cut any spending in the face of repeated requests from President Obama to raise the debt ceiling even as the citizenry – and the elected GOP – screamed for fiscal responsibility and debt reduction.

Of course, we shouldn’t be surprised that Mr. Reid had an underhanded and completely partisan reason for not following the law. We should have come to understand that the Progressives of the 21st Century are vicious, win-at-all-cost, slash-and-burners when then-House Majority Leader Nancy Pelosi (P-CA), dismissed the idea of legitimately legislating the ACA by saying,

“We will go through the gate. If the gate is closed, we will go over the fence. If the fence is too high, we will pole-vault in. If that doesn’t work, we will parachute in. But we are going to get health care reform passed for the American people for their own personal health and economic security and for the important role that it will play in reducing the deficit.”

And we should have known that 21st Century Progressives would scald their own Mothers to submission to advance their cause when we were subjected to the over-the-top and venomous assaults they made on duly elected officials who dared to disagree with their political agenda:

“It is embarrassing that these people who are elected to represent the country are representing the TEA Party, the anarchists of the country…” – Sen. Harry Reid, (D-NV)

“Obama will not – he cannot – negotiate with a roving band of anarchists who say, ‘Build our oil pipeline or the troops don’t get paid.’” – Former Obama Speechwriter Jon Favreau

“I have never seen such an extreme group of people adopt such an insane policy.” – Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY)

“These people have come unhinged.” – Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (P-FL)

“I believe it’s terrorism…This is an attempt to destroy all we know of the republican form of government in this country.” – Chris Matthews, MSNBC

“What we’re not for is negotiating with people with a bomb strapped to their chest.” – Dan Pfeiffer, White House Senior Adviser

“I call them ‘legislative arsonists.’ They’re there to burn down what we should be building up…” – Nancy Pelosi (P-CA)

I could go on but you get the picture.

The bottom line here is this. Progressives will do anything and say anything; they will lie, cheat and steal, to achieve their goals; their agendas. They will alter the Constitution, create new behemoth entitlement programs, spend, raise taxes and amass debt from which there is no return, in any and all efforts to advance their nanny-state, centralized government vision for our country. And if those who believe in Constitutional law, States’ Rights, individualism, personal responsibility the free market and liberty don’t take a stand – now…well, it will all be over very, very soon…at the hands of the Progressives’ ideological death panel.

Of course, these are just the ravings of an “unhinged, roving legislative arsonist touting an insane terrorist policy, a bomb strapped to my chest,” don’t you know…

]]>http://www.conservativedailynews.com/2013/09/saturday-night-cigar-lounge-sept-28th/feed/0Progressives, Dems Slap the Faces of Benghazi Deadhttp://www.conservativedailynews.com/2013/09/progressives-dems-slap-the-faces-of-benghazi-dead/
http://www.conservativedailynews.com/2013/09/progressives-dems-slap-the-faces-of-benghazi-dead/#commentsFri, 20 Sep 2013 14:10:06 +0000http://www.conservativedailynews.com/?p=94303In a move that illustrates why the overwhelming majority of American’s have grown to despise partisan politics – and come to be understandably offended by the actions of the Left, Progressives and Democrats on the House Oversight & Government Reform Committee executed – under the guise of protest – one of the most insensitive and disrespectful actions in the history of the United States House of Representatives. They staged a pre-planned and organized “walkout” before the testimonies of the families of those slaughtered in Banghazi on September 11, 2012.

Those elected to office are sent to Washington to represent the whole of their constituencies, not just those with whom they agree. By staging this inarguably childish – and ultimately selfish – political theater, they have abdicated their responsibility to represent those with whom they disagree ideologically. This is an abdication of their obligation to the office; to their constituents. It is an action that even their supporters should abhor and, in fact, penalize them for.

Earlier today, an important hearing regarding the attack on Benghazi was being held by the House Oversight & Government Reform Committee. The parents of the Benghazi heroes who died fighting to protect the US consulate were about to speak.

Then, in a turn of events that’s disgusting even by DC standards, most of the Democrats stood up and walked out. Apparently, they were either protesting or trying to show disrespect — either way, if there was any honor in their districts at all, this would end their careers…

Remember, last week John Kerry stopped the Benghazi survivors from being even questioned by congress.

What were these vicious ideologues trying to prove? That they could be indignant to the point of insulting parents and family who had to receive coffins in place of an embrace from their loved ones as they returned home from serving their country?

What was the statement the country was supposed to take away from their actions? That they are too good to listen to the grief that their political party’s infantile foreign policy has foisted onto these families?

Will these indignant Progressive and Liberal zealots have us believe that there was some “higher principle” to take away from their affront to the aggrieved; some “larger purpose” to their hate-filled and arrogant actions?

Progressives and Liberals would have you believe that their party – the Democrat Party – is the party of compassion and understanding; that the Democrat Party is the political party that commiserates with those affected by “social injustice” and morally transgressed in our country. The actions of these fifteen intellectual reprobates proves – in no uncertain terms – that Progressives couldn’t care less about those they disagree with, even when life has been lost…even when life has been lost in the service of our country…even when life has been lost in the service of our country at their political party’s direction (or indirection, if you will).

“Every time I see this on TV, I see these bloody fingerprints crawling down the wall of that Benghazi place, and I keep asking everybody…‘Do those belong to my son?!’”

How can any human being – elected to office or not, ideologue or not – care less about this woman’s torture; care less about that singularly important question? What kind of monster(s) ignores this woman’s plea for answers?

With each footstep that each of these fifteen political derelicts took leading to the doors of the committee chamber, we should all remember that those were footsteps that Amb. Chris Stevens, Diplomat Sean Smith, and former Navy SEALs Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty will never – ever – be able to take…anywhere…ever.

I think it is safe to say that the actions of these fifteen “lawmakers” exemplify the worst in American politics today.

The sad thing in all of this is that there are people who will vote for these national disgraces again in 2014, dismissing their cruel and unusual actions against the grieving families of the Benghazi dead. To those people I say, when you cast your vote for one of these fifteen, take note of the blood dripping from your hand, because it is there.

I must say, over the years I have become thoroughly disgusted with the Progressive movement for their selfish, narcissistic and ignorant nature. This action seals it.

God bless those who lost their lives in the Benghazi slaughter, for which our Commander-In-Chief offered no aid; for which our President and his Progressive minions have affected no justice. And God protect those who grieve for their loss.